It looks like you're using an Ad Blocker.

Please white-list or disable AboveTopSecret.com in your ad-blocking tool.

Thank you.

 

Some features of ATS will be disabled while you continue to use an ad-blocker.

 

Pictures Prove Mini Nukes Caused 9-11 Devastation

page: 7
23
<< 4  5  6    8  9  10 >>

log in

join
share:

posted on Sep, 26 2010 @ 12:49 AM
link   
reply to post by thedman
 


yes i know it is a result of wtc 6 explosion.
i viewed the video and what footage are the cars please?



edit on 26-9-2010 by slugger9787 because: viewed the video and what footage are the cars please?




posted on Sep, 26 2010 @ 12:52 AM
link   
reply to post by Mythkiller
 


sweet. i look forward to the proof of high levels of radiation being found at the site.



posted on Sep, 26 2010 @ 01:01 AM
link   
hmmmm?


edit on 26-9-2010 by aliengenes because: none



posted on Sep, 26 2010 @ 01:01 AM
link   

Originally posted by thedman

Many vehicles were ignited by burning debris or jet fuel falling from towers



Jet fuel caused cars blocks away to spontaneously explode too?? Wow, this jet fuel really gets around doesnt it?

Honestly, you OS guys come up with some outlandish excuses but this has to be one of the best I've heard yet!



posted on Sep, 26 2010 @ 01:09 AM
link   
reply to post by snusfanatic
 


"The spectrum and percentages of cancer are massive. There are at least 4
classifications of blood-cell cancers :
leukemia, lymphoma, Hodgkin's and myeloma. There are many more classifications of soft
tissue cancers. There is brain cancer
. There is breast
cancer. For most
of these there are subclassifications of many different types of specific cancer in
each, so far not publicly disclosed. There are huge percentages of respiratory
distress and loss of
function. Multiple reports of 'irregular cycles' (miscarriages?). Most likely there will
be several more types of cancer to follow. In particular, responders should be checked
for thyroid cancer and function. There has been no noting of birth defects which also
needs to be done. There is one thing and only one thing that can cause all these cancers
and problems - RADIATION."


Dr. Ward contends that "the factual evidence indicates that our government is using and
has used 3rd or possibly 4th generation hydrogen bombs domestically and internationally.
The evidence for international usage is not quite as strong as the domestic usage, but
when domestic usage is considered, the international usage seems inescapable. The
process of exclusion based on the known facts leaves only one viable option for the
destruction of the World Trade Center (WTC) buildings-a relatively pure hydrogen bomb."
Take a look also at Dr. Ward 's
Update on thermal imaging post the WTC event. It's an eye-opener.


groups.google.com...



4th generation does not produce radiation.



posted on Sep, 26 2010 @ 01:36 AM
link   
reply to post by Nonchalant
 



Originally posted by Nonchalant
reply to post by JohnJasper
 


I still would expect a nuclear device to have caused more damage.

Also, a nuke doesnt explain toasted & flipped cars some as far as 7 blocks away from the WTC and why were many of them noticeably missing their doorhandles??

www.drjudywood.com...


Nonchalant, I would have agreed with you a few weeks back until I started reading/watching the sources provided on my first post in this thread. With help from a few other members, I'm increasing my understanding of what is possible with nukes these days.

Toasted and flipped cars 7 blocks away cannot be ignored unless you're writing the OS but they don't necessarily have to have been caused by nukes any more than they have to be explained by conventional explosives, DEW or fires caused by airliner impacts. The evidence gathered at the scene is/would have been critical to investigating the cause of the burning cars.

Whenever I watch video from the day, I look for any moments that show before and after car fires to hopefully witness the cause of one of them but so far have not been lucky.



posted on Sep, 26 2010 @ 01:59 AM
link   
reply to post by deadruby2006
 



Originally posted by deadruby2006
Is no one else experiencing suspicion of DEW (directed energy weapons)?


I'm not convinced but cannot rule out the use of one. Perhaps they thought that this would be a good day to test one out live but it cannot explain the force and speed of the destruction of the building. We've all seen the huge, multi-floor explosion that initiated the 2nd tower collapse. It shot steel assemblies weighing tons 400ft across the road to impale into buildings as you will have seen on Dr Judy's website and others.

IMO, that explosion was either caused by a huge explosive force detonated at that height or by a greater force travelling up the building from an underground blast designed to pulverize the core.

In this video, watch from about 2:10 to see how the steel core stripped of all encumbrances remains standing for a short time after the rest of the building has disappeared into dust.



posted on Sep, 26 2010 @ 02:17 AM
link   
reply to post by thedman
 


Here in video can see burning vehicles long before collapse of the towers

Check out 1 minute into

This is 15 minutes before South Tower collapse - burning vehicles alrewady apparent

Many vehicles were ignited by burning debris or jet fuel falling from towers

www.youtube.com...



thedman - the video does show a burning car but the cause of that fire is undetermined. It is more likely to have been caused by lobby level fireballs reported by numerous witnesses occuring at the time of the aircraft impacts, the same fireballs that blew out all windows of the lobby which are nicely visible in the 9/11 Mysteries documentary but also available right here:




posted on Sep, 26 2010 @ 06:44 AM
link   
reply to post by slugger9787
 



yes i know it is a result of wtc 6 explosion.
i viewed the video and what footage are the cars please?
.


Shot is of burning vehicles near Marriott (WTC 3) at base of South Tower - WTC 6 is in far background of shot

At base of tower several people fatally burned by jet fuel raining down to street

Need eyes checked - watch as camera pans in on burning vehicle about 1:15 in

What was that about spontaneous combustion ?



posted on Sep, 26 2010 @ 09:27 PM
link   
thedman, i already posted a link to the EMS worker who gave eyewitness testimony about that.
Spontaneously combustion.



posted on Sep, 27 2010 @ 02:24 AM
link   
reply to post by slugger9787
 



Originally posted by slugger9787
reply to post by Nonchalant

killtown.blogspot.com...


Nice one, slugger9787. This is the first time that I've heard of this EMS technician's statement. There's so much to consider between her original statement (in pdf) and the interview with Killtown which, even taken with a pinch of salt, paints a picture of the events on Veasy that is supported by the photo evidence of what remained of the buildings post collapse.

... As I was running, parked cars were blowing up and some were on fire, the street was cracking a bit as well.

...The burning cars were between my ambulance [parked between 5 & 6] and about the middle of the 6 World Trade where the lobby doors were at.

...I was attempting to put my stretcher back into the vehicle. The ground was shaking and I saw a sea of people, mostly the various agencies on scene, Fire, Police, EMS, all running towards me.
(but note that in other parts of her statement, she says)
...My partner and I grabbed our stretcher, went to put it in the back of our vehicle, and at that time, I think it was the lobby of the building [WTC 5] behind us blew out.

It's funny that she forgot about her jacket and her hair being on fire in the Killtown interview but understandable that she'd suppress such things.

It's also a shame that Killtown "fed" information into the interview instead of just getting her story. As an example:



KT: Can you estimate how long after you heard the loud rumbling, which was the South Tower coming down, to when you witnessed these explosives going off in the WTC 6?

PO: Well, remember this was all on the same street I was parked. It is very difficult for me to estimate time with so much happening at once, but I want to say maybe 2 to 3 minutes from the rumbling and the ground, and the cars, and the fires, that I tried to run into 6 WTC for cover, which is when I saw those explosions.


Her story is a bit all over the place and as she admits, she didn't know the big picture until later. She didn't know that she was running from the tower collapse but did know that she was running away from the WTC 5 which had just been blown up, she witnessed supervised demolition in WTC 6 and another explosion either from 6 or from the NY Telephone building and of course the spontaneously exploding cars even on North Park.

Yes, there's a lot to ponder in there and I'll be busy chasing down what I can of it.



posted on Sep, 27 2010 @ 02:13 PM
link   
reply to post by JohnJasper
 


Further to my previous reply, I'm reviewing this list of statements from firefighters:
Firemen evacuating WTC1 after WTC2 collapsed




RONALD COYNE EMT WTC2 thunderous sound, then sway, then collapse; and debris set him on fire

At that point I just heard a THUNDEROUS SOUND [remember time delay for sound-JJ] AND LOOKED up AND SAW THE BUILDING START TO TOPPLE START TO SWAY, AND IT WAS SWAYING OUR WAY AND WE JUST YELLED RUN AND TRIED TO RUN AS FAST AS COULD AND SAW AN SUV PARKED AND FIGURED THAT THAT WOULD TAKE SOME YOU KNOW SOME OF THE HIT BECAUSE I KNEW COULDNT OUT RUN THE BUILDING AND BY THE TIME IT TOOK ME TO BREAK THE BACK WINDOW OF THE SUV. MY SAFETY COAT WAS ALREADY ON FIRE. MY SOCKS WERE ON FIRE

I was already covered with soot and all sorts of particles that were coming out of the building. I dived into the truck, and that’s when pieces of the BUILDING LIFTED THE TRUCK AND CAME THROUGH THE FRONT WINDOW AND FLIPPED THE TRUCK OVER AND I WAS TRAPPED IN THERE FOR APPROXIMATELY 25 MINUTES TO HALF HOUR. I was just covered with burns and bruises and I could hardly breathe.




FIREFIGHTER WILLIAM REYNOLDS
WTC2- large explosion below plane impact area before the collapse

After a while, I was distracted by a large explosion from the south tower and it seemed like fire was shooting out a couple of hundred feet in each direction, then all of a sudden the top of the tower started coming down in a pancake. I remember my jaw dropping and just staring at it and Richard Banaciski, one of the firemen that was there, yelled "Run" and I turned and I started running into the parking garage of the Financial Center.

Q. Bill, just one question. The fire that you saw, where was the fire? Like up at the upper levels where it started collapsing?

A. It appeared somewhere below that. Maybe twenty floors below the impact area of the plane. I saw it as fire and when I looked at it on television afterwards, it doesn't appear to show the fire. It shows a rush of smoke coming out below the area of the plane impact.

The reason why I think the cameras didn't get that image is because they were a far distance away and maybe I saw the bottom side where the plane was and the smoke was up above it.





EMT JOHN ROTHMUND

WTC2

At that time we were looking at the top of the towers and all the rubble and people coming off, and all of a sudden you heard – it sounded like another airplane, or a missile. It was like a slow shake. The whole ground just vibrated and shook. We just told everybody to run, run into a building, let's go, run, run, run.


There's plenty of evidence of demolition via charges in the building as well as the major explosive damage that could only be attributable to a nuke(s.) No end of people reporting the shaking, the sound of an incoming aircraft or missile before the collapse started and the building blowing up many floors below the impact level.

Obviously the debunkers will have already found a way to ignore this evidence.



posted on Sep, 27 2010 @ 02:15 PM
link   
I guess tons of concrete, drywall, asbestos and other construction materials wouldnt make that dust cloud...
You truthers really need to come up with something that would prove this was a detonation, this aint it, sorry.



posted on Sep, 27 2010 @ 02:34 PM
link   
reply to post by HomerinNC
 


the floors were 4" thick concrete.
the dust cloud consisted of concrete,
sheetrock, and sublimated steel, among other things.

this stuff was not turned to dust by a gravity collapse.
why?
Because the massive dust cloud appears way too soon after the building starts to fall, way too soon.

pulverization of sheetrock, concrete, steel caused by other energy source that gavity.

Look at what the OCS is claiming that gravity did:

Throws 40 ton steel 600 feet,
dustifies concrete, sheetrock,
heats up steel
destroys two 1200 foot tall steel towers to the ground in



posted on Sep, 27 2010 @ 03:08 PM
link   
reply to post by slugger9787
 


Show me evidence of a nuke, and not just a debris cloud

Wake up from your dreaming



posted on Sep, 27 2010 @ 03:14 PM
link   
reply to post by HomerinNC
 


www.journalof911studies.com...

describes the impossibility of dustification of concrete.

you need to take small steps.

first you gotta get up next to the reality that pancake/gravity did not dustify the concrete sheetrock and then go from there.



posted on Sep, 28 2010 @ 04:09 PM
link   
reply to post by slugger9787
 


Here's a nice addition to the information about the nuke arsenal: Suitcase Nukes : Homeland Security News



A suitcase nuke or suitcase bomb is a very compact and portable nuclear weapon and could have the dimensions of 60 x 40 x 20 centimeters or 24 x 16 x 8 inches. The smallest possible bomb-like object would be a single critical mass of plutonium (or U-233) at maximum density under normal conditions.

The Pu-239 weighs 10.5 kg and is 10.1 cm across. It doesn’t take much more than a single critical mass to cause significant explosions ranging from 10-20 tons. These types of weapons can also be as big as two footlockers.


Additional commentary from Ed Ward



The Pu-239 weighs 10.5 kg and is 10.1 cm across. It doesn’t take much more than a single critical mass to cause significant explosions ranging from 10-20 tons. These types of weapons can also be as big as two footlockers. (Highly doubtful this is the smallest nuke they have - CLASSIFIED - so they put out old BS sizes. EW).

(It has long been suspected HIGHLY REFINED - EXTREMELY PURE Pu-239 has been used in all the micro nuke blasts - very little long term radiation in a highly selectable output range. This is the first official 'confirmation' of its use in Micro Nukes. Amazing how the 'terrorists' nukes have gotten smaller than the 'official acknowledgement' of any Micro Nuke the US possesses.)


Radiation in the first hour after an explosion is about 90 percent, with it going down to about 1 percent of the original level after two days. Radiation only drops to trace levels after 300 hours. (Again, this is the first official HOURLY breakdown of 'radiation' after a Micro Nuke Explosion.)


It begs the question: Why spend weeks running det-lead through the building when you can just place a suitcase nuke on as many floors as is necessary to get the job done?



posted on Sep, 28 2010 @ 04:35 PM
link   
And it just keeps coming:
Were ‘Mini-Nukes’ Used to Bring Down WTC?




Could New York City’s World Trade Center (WTC) have actually been nuked on the morning of Sept. 11, 2001? The possibility of such a scenario arose during this writer’s Aug. 23 interview with aerospace and chemical engineer T. Mark Hightower. As a member and petition signer of
Architects and Engineers for 9-11 Truth, Hightower has studied the works of military explosives experts, investigators from Finland, the UK and Russia, along with various physicists, both named and anonymous.





Hightower provided a theory: “Regular detonators and nano-thermites were potentially used as incendiary devices to cut through metal on the WTC’s exterior sections. But if mini-nukes were located at the building’s core and shielded from view, no one would have seen their extremely bright flashes and superheated explosions. The release was so energetic that it may have momentarily reached millions of degrees.”


I think that the nano-thermite distraction and the extreme efforts from the disinfo teams of late have failed to stop this unavoidable truth from approaching critical mass. It might be too late to do anything about it but at least we can feel smug about seeing the light before being marched off to the gulags.



posted on Sep, 28 2010 @ 09:00 PM
link   
reply to post by JohnJasper
 



It begs the question: Why spend weeks running det-lead through the building when you can just place a suitcase nuke on as many floors as is necessary to get the job done?


So explain if someone set off nuclear weapons in not one, but 2 buildings why there were survivors in the North Tower - 14 in stairway, 2 in concourse underneath, 2 more who were in stairway and thrown clear onto debris pile and 2 Port Authority PD trapped in elevator shaft.

Explain how they survived and had not trace os radiation poisoning

Explain why not traces of radiation found - you just went into large discourse on Plutonium, Why no residues
from nuclear blast, would be plenty of fallout as blast in contact with ground .



posted on Sep, 29 2010 @ 12:21 AM
link   

Originally posted by thedman
reply to post by JohnJasper
 



It begs the question: Why spend weeks running det-lead through the building when you can just place a suitcase nuke on as many floors as is necessary to get the job done?


So explain if someone set off nuclear weapons in not one, but 2 buildings why there were survivors in the North Tower - 14 in stairway, 2 in concourse underneath, 2 more who were in stairway and thrown clear onto debris pile and 2 Port Authority PD trapped in elevator shaft.

Explain how they survived and had not trace os radiation poisoning


because they were below the CONE of the blast thedman, that is why, and the tower, most of it evaporated above them, most but not all, thus sparing their lives.
they were below the ARCH OF DESTRUCTION

www.saunalahti.fi...


edit on 29-9-2010 by slugger9787 because: ARCH OF DESTRUCTION




top topics



 
23
<< 4  5  6    8  9  10 >>

log in

join